Thursday, April 29, 2004

Pearl Necklaces and Legal Analysis on the Enemy Combatant Cases: Tony Mauro, of the The Legal Times Reports here that "But in the end, it remained unclear where the Court may come down." Also, in Legal Affairs (the first general-interest magazine about the law for non-lawyers as well as lawyers -- all other legal magazines bow before it) reports here that Justice Margaret Marshall wore a "tailored black pantsuit, black heels, and double strands of pearls around her neck and one wrist."

Congratulations to the winners of the writing competition at Legal Affairs: a magazine about people who have heard of Yale Law School. The winners, the majority of which are not only from Yale Law School but will clerk for appellate judges. The competition between the judges for clerks that won the competition consisted of general-knowledge questions about How Appealing and a swimsuit competition. From time to time I go to Pennsylvania, therefore one token winner attends the University of Pennsylvania law school.

Wednesday, April 28, 2004

Love plus one. Sometime tonight, or tomorrow, this humble blog will top 7,000 hits. I thank you for your enthusiastic interest in How Appalling. I can only hope that by this blog's six month anniversary we can get another 220,500 hits, so I can brag, er, be just like my idol. In the meantime, I'll keep updating you every time my counter adds another digit. I just know you all find it as fascinating as I do, like I said here, here, here, here, here, here, here, here, here, here, here, here, and here (and those were just the times I mentioned my hits in 2002!).
Bashing Howard is Yale Law School: My research assistant, after reading Logic for Lawyers (which was written by Ruggero J. Aldisert, whom I interviewed and who incidentally is a judge of the 3rd Circuit, where I practice) concluded that Yale Law School and Bashing Howard are one and the same.

The syllogism follows:

Bashing Howard is How Appalling.
How Appalling is Legal Affairs.
Legal Affairs is Yale Law School.
Therefore, Bashing Howard is Yale Law School.
I no longer read the opinions: Follow this link for an announcement of two recent Supreme Court decisions.

UPDATE: I meant that you should follow this link. My truly outstanding legal web log (which is now hosted by Legal Affairs, which is a magazine of the Yale Law School) will always provide cutting-edge commentary and scholarly analysis. Thus, I will tell my readers which justice wrote the majority opinion, any and all concurrences, and any and all dissents.
Civil Liberties in the News: A reminder to all of you anxiously awaiting oral arguments in Padilla v. Rumsfeld, a case involving the executive’s power to detain American citizens: Legal Affairs provides up-to-the-every-other-month human-interest stories about the legal profession and can be yours for a small fee. The money goes to my fourth alma mater: Yale Law School. Also, Lawschool.com, edited by Stan Chess, announces in the middle of their page that "LawSchool.com is offering a reward of $5,000 to the first person providing info leading to the indictment and conviction of the individual who has been sabotaging the LawSchool.com website by posting large quantities of racist and otherwise offensive comments." I wonder if the Green Bag (the only humor that accomplished appellate litigators are allowed to talk about) will make a bobblehead of Stan Chess, who does what I do. Only with law students. And not as much. And certainly not in the Third Circuit (which is, by the way, the dancingist circuit). If someone could email me a link to the "racist material" and "offensive material," and include some kind words about my blog, I would greatly appreciate it. Finally, I found this complaint letter about me, here. None of it is true. Therefore, I will be deleting the link to it. Please do not click on it.

Update: Stan Chess started his own law school, Manhattan Law School here. Stay tuned to this website for details of my own law school which will utilize the cutting-edge technology of Movable Type.

Thursday, April 22, 2004

Personality conflict: Enraged Ironically Federalist Liberal with a Misogynistic Streak wages war on everything here.

Wednesday, April 21, 2004

Appellate Litigation is Popular: I can hardly contain my excitement. How Appalling is now #2 on Google's search for "Appalling." This must mean that people like to learn about appellate law from a top-notch appellate litigator. It is #1 if you do this search ! Also, someone looked at this blog using Opera today. I am finally getting the kind of visitors that I want. Speaking of visitors, if you want to avoid catching Herpes, be sure and visit Legal Affairs magazine here.
The Next Set of 20 Questions.: The Greedy Clerks have agreed to be the next guest on "20 Questions with an Appellate Judge." While I have eliminated them from the links on the right-hand side of the page because they dared to question my infallibility, and make fun of my name, I figure that it is necessary to massage their egos by asking them 20 questions as I was too busy to interview myself as was briefly noted on this blog. While Greedy Clerks are not appellate judges, their egos are almost as large, and they are widely purported to be the electronic manifestations of the demons that lurk inside the souls of appellate judges, so it is almost the same -- perhaps better! Already suggested questions have been flooding my mailbox and instant-message thingy. However, because they are so wonderful that even a top-notch appellate litigator could not bear to hear their voices, I will not verbalize the questions, but they will be promoted to answer the questions anyway. In national news, the south rose again. Just kidding.

Tuesday, April 20, 2004

No censuring of 20 Questions in the Ninth Circuit

The Ninth Circuit has held that prisoners may read How Appealing. This, no doubt, was prompted by Judge Reinhardt, who did not want my interview with him to go unnoticed. However, I do note that Judge Reinhardt has a "less than perfect" record before the Supreme Court. You can read the Ninth Circuit opinion, featuring the "less than perfect" Judge Reinhardt (whom I interviewed) here. Click on this page of the opinion to see a reference to my truly outstanding legal web log.
Ho Ho Ho. While I previously stated that my new relationship with Legal Affairs Magazine would not affect my posting habits ("my postings will continued [sic] to appear whenever and however I choose"), I suddenly feel the urge to randomly link to the table of contents of Legal Affairs Magazine. Go figure.
Feeding Frenzy: I now have an RSS-feed in my blog, which is now part of a news magazine. This way, people whose blogs consist of newsfeeds can now have access to my blog which is a newsfeed in itself. This is pretty trippy. Speaking of that, John Gibbons, who argued for the petitioner in Rasul, was on the Third Circuit. He retired. See, if I was on the Third Circuit I would get to argue in front of the Supreme Court after I retire. Also, Bag and Baggage, written by my friend Denise Howell, who also is a top-notch appellate practitioner, says "Have you ever wondered what a federal appellate judge might sound like in IM-speak?" and then links to me! And finally a reader emails me to say:

Dear Howard,

I heard that appellate and intellectual property lawyer Denise Howell is being seriously considered for the Third Circuit. Jealous?

Well, I would never be jealous of appellate and intellectual property lawyer Denise Howell. Not a bit. This reminds me of a trivia question. Since Ms. Howell lives in the geographic area that is known as the "Ninth Circuit" can someone name a judge in the Third Circuit who has his chambers in the Ninth. Hint: it is in my "20 questions with an appellate judge." So read it, and click on whatever banner ads that Legal Affairs, a nonprofit organization might have seen fit to put beside it.

Good news and bad news! The Greedy Clerks have said good things about my blog here, here, and here. On the bad side, is seems that many of the Greedy Clerks, when logging on from home, use Macs or AOL. Since I get many hits from USCourts.gov and the Supreme Court, I am quite disappointed that such respect is diluted by hits from AOL.com.

Even though I pretend to know very little about computers, because I am a top-notch appellate litigator I know that not using Unix is unprofessional behavior. Would you like it if I did not submit my wonderous high-quality briefs to your judges or do everything that Kozinski tells me to do to lose an appeal? I think not. Well, reading my blog using a Mac, or AOL shows very little respect for such a high quality class-act tip-top A1 best-of-the-batch litigator like myself! Finally, stay tuned to Goldstein and Howe's blog for details about the Gitmo oral arguments today. Did you know that I giggle like a schoolgirl when I say "ScotusBlog"?

Monday, April 19, 2004

More porn links: Click here for HIV porn; more DOJ porn; virtual porn; more HIV porn; ISP porn; and finally, a link to an article by Clinton Dick.
Changes! If all goes as planned, at midnight, How Appaling will turn into a werewolf. An ancient third circuit legend has it that top-notch appellate litigators turn into werewolves as soon as their blogs reach a certain number of hits. I a getting very close and I feel the hair growing in places that hair has never grown before.
By popular demand. As most of you know, I continually get IMed by very important people. In fact, some of the important people that I get IMed by talk to god. Now, as a appellate litigator, I am used to talking, on an informal basis to life-tenured judges. I really respect them because they respect me. Anyway, this is a very special edition of “20 questions with an appellate judge” because it was initiated by the judge himself.

PRyOr11cir: U there?

1. Bashing: Asl?
PRyOr11cir: 44/M/11th cir hahah! Rofl

2. Bashing: kewl. What you up to?
PRyOr11cir: I M chln n d cta11, hoping dat Kerry wiL lose d election & I wiL b 4e n my post.

3. Bashing: cn I ask U 20 :-Qz? 4 my blog. mAbE U hav heard of it here, here, here, here, here, or here.
PRyOr11cir: n. I d internet iz 4 fags. I onlE IM ppl. I cn TLK 2 aL of my fRnds n d Fedrlst Sosiete DIS way.

4. Bashing: Do U suport d law clerk hirering plan?
PRyOr11cir: I hav my own plan 2 hire law clerks. I gota L%k out 4 # 1. dat iz me. I hire d law clerks dat hlp me out, wen I wnt. I M freestyle, ya knO.

5. Bashing: wot bout splitting d ninth circuit in2 a zillion pieces lIk midevil o somTIN?
PRyOr11cir:I rly admire d co-circuits of d ninth circuit, & d ninth circuit wud b much BetA f ther wer mo of dem

6. Bashing: wot judges do U admire?
PRyOr11cir: d 3:o)z on SX court.

7. Bashing: As attorney general of sme southern st8 nt n D 3rd circuit U, @ prayed dat der wd B no mor Souters. nw ur decisions mYt B aPealed 2 a cort wich includes Justice Souter. Won’t U B a lil :")?
PRyOr11cir: w@ kinda Q S dat, homeboy? dnt U belief n seperation of chrch n st8. wen I T2 D lord n 1 million of my peeps itz anon.

8. Bashing: No rly. hw DY feel bout Justice Souter?
PRyOr11cir: ROFL, LMAOBBQ: mayB f Justice Souter had Hs gme 2gtha he wd av a recess appt lk me. rmbr: I didn't gt a recess appt coz peopel thort I wz daft. Recess appointments r reserved 1ly 4 D smartest ppl n D wrld n Snoopy dogG Dogg.

PRyOr11cir: w@?
Bashing: That is funnier than watching the documentary about Hitler on the History Channel. I hope that the History Channel someday does a piece about my blog which you can read here.
PRyOr11cir: tnx

10. Bashing: DY tnk dat Im smrt nuf 2 gt a recess appt 2 D 3rd cir?
PRyOr11cir: No mn. U gotta play D gme, d00d. U gotta wrk dat stuf n stop W D www. U gotta wrt real articles, lk stuf n D Cumberland LR. rofl!

11. Bashing: DdU alight frm takN dwn moore?
PRyOr11cir: A mn hz gotta du w@ a mn hz gotta du, UNo w@ I mean? Moore wz st&ing n D wA of # 1, dats me. Sure, I lk D 10 commandments (not D JooVer), bt I gotta st& ^ 4 watz ryt, n watz ryt S me bn on D 11th.

12. Bashing: du ppl evr tnk dat ura 2d-rte esq who's ego S 1ly bigA thN w@ oder ppl tnk of him, hu gets a perverse buzz ovr ppl mentioning Hs nme? f so, Y? dnt U uz hyperlinks?
PRyOr11cir: No mn. I got mor cls thN an ass @ BIGLAW 1st yr. I dnt uz hyperlinks coz thyre 4 fags.

13. Bashing: f U wr a trE, w@ kinda trE wd U B?
PRyOr11cir: dat isn’t d proper :-Q 2 ask of a real mang! A real mang lIkz sports. Even recess judges R real men. I mean, cum on, L%k @ U, U Lnk 2 DIS blog – I wud knO how bad it iz f I rED stuff on d internet. Which I don’t.

14. Bashing: I M obligated 2 ask U how U fEl bout unpublished opinions. U knO, rule 33.1. az a recess judge hu didn’t git appointed cuz of thR blog, cn U teL me how U fEl bout rule 33.1
PRyOr11cir: I decline 2 Ans dat :-Q on d grounds dat som mite sA dat undR CFTC v. Schor, d evrtng I wrte mite hav n precedential valU. wutevA d case, I cn sA dat I M not political @ aL. n politics hEr. I M #1 judge. evry1 Ls droolz.

15. Bashing: wot iz judicial activism? f so, Y don’t U sua esponte mAk it impossible 4 d dirty hos n d 11th circuit 2 hav abortions?
PRyOr11cir: evry decision dat I dun lIk iz activist. az a true federalist we knO dat we onlE cn interpret d law & not rewriter it. aL U nEd 2 do iz ask me, & I wiL teL U which Supreme Court decisions R activist. I knO dem wen I c dem. I wont teL U how I knO cuz U R not populR Enuf 2 git appointed 2 NE bench.

16. Bashing: Don’t U fEl a ltl bad dat despite yor kind manner & massive publicAtN record dat U stil annoyed d Democrats?
PRyOr11cir: lmgdao! :)

17. Bashing: Since U hav nevr publically condemned homosexuality, wiL U tAk d opRtunET 2 declare rght nw, & 4 d record dat U wiL nevr hire a (x) law clerk & dat U wiL nevr Dcide a case n favor of NE (x) intRStz. f U dun do DIS, wiL assume dat U lIk d ACLU.
PRyOr11cir: n. ther iz stil a chnc dat Kerry mite git re-elected. f he doesnt, we wiL pRT lIk it iz 2000.

18. Bashing: lt me ask U 'gen. f I printed out my blog & MD it 2 U, by d us postal srvic eva two hrz, wud U rED it?
PRyOr11cir: bt of corS, howevR, U must promise dat aL of my opinions R considRD breakN nuz. aL lnks 2 me must b specifically designated, & not jst caLd “here.”

19. Bashing: f U wer appointed & confirmed by Congress 2 d 3rd circuit, which, by d way, I practice aL d tym b4, wud U tAk it?
PRyOr11cir: Of corS not. d 3rd Circuit iz inferior 2 d 11th circuit, & d quality of practice b4 d 3rd circuit iz considerably lowR thN b4 d 11th. DIS iz Y we R so gr8.

20. Do U suport a Constitutional amendment dat wud allow Congress 2 overrule onlE d 11th circuit cuz of d lowR quality of itz recess appointements?
PRyOr11cir: F-u. d 11th circuit nevr mAkz decisions on d basis of politics – especalE d judges hu wer appointed w/o d consent of Congress. God teLz me wot 2 do, & ppl hu disagree R fagz.

Anyway, if you would like to be a guest on another very special "20 questions with an appellate judge" please IM me.

Saturday, April 17, 2004

A programming note: It is coming! The full transcipt of the very special interview with PRyOr11cir might be posted at any minute now!!! Make sure and check this blog as much as possible. Also, donating to the blog will make it come faster. Make sure and forward the URL to all of your coworkers. You want to do nothing more than to do this. When you wake up you will remember nothing of this post. In other news, I am blogging from the bathroom at a family reunion. This resembles a certain scene in Deconstructing Harry, only with blogging.

Friday, April 16, 2004

My worlds are colliding! The American Bar Association's publication, the ABA Journal, has a story in its weekly eReport, about this site called "Flogging the Blogger." I am quoted, both in my orignal and parodied version.

Although I say in the article that I find the existence of How Appalling to be "an honor and distinction," I still refuse to link to it from my blog. I am, however, in a quandry. How can I point out this awesome coverage in the ABA Journal eReport, without at least tacitly acknowledging the existence of How Appalling?

If any of you have an answer to my quandry, I would love you hear from you in email, a process which you can initiate by clicking here.

Update: I decided to tread a middle course. In this post I acknowlege the ABA Journal eReport's article, but do not acknowledge How Appalling.

Thursday, April 15, 2004

Another link to me: In case you didn't know it, people like me, not only because I am brilliant, but because my web log is a truly outstanding legal web log. Crime & Federalism says so here.
News about me from around the world!

As many of you who follow my blog know, I am blogging from a baseball game. Many of you have not yet sent in your donations that would allow me to blog from a baseball game, in § 123. So, if you happen to see me at the baseball game in § 123, be sure and send me $50. Remember, it is your moral duty to pay for what you use. I accept money via Amazon or Paypal. So, if you are at the baseball game, you can walk within three rows of me, and using your wireless PDA, send me money. I will wave at you. If you have not paid yet, stop reading now. Everyone paid up? Good. Mr. Poon really likes this post. He does. He said so here! Nate agreed here. Legal Affairs, a magazine that I really like has an article about saying bad things about your boss on a blog. I would never do that.

Remember folks, keep checking this blog as I might post the entire instant message transcript of my unprecedented chat with PRyOr11cir at any time. I have already released it to my very best clients! They all responded that I was an "l33t 1tg8r."

Tech Law Advisor mentions me here. However, he does not praise me. This has thrown me for a loop because it never happened before. Law From the Center says here that this blog is dead. However, my spirits are lifted because The Greedy Clerks, are engaged in their normal antics of accusing each other of having multiple identities. What is important to understand, is that their conversation revolves around me! Now they (my spirits, that is) are even higher because I googled myself and got this pic. She must be an appellate litigator or something. I was site of the week of the Oklahoma Bar Association. Justice Sandra Day O'Connor will be protested at Seaton Hall Law School by people who don't like her. I like her. A letter to the editor in the Fairbanks New-Miner reads, in part "I want to commend Ed for being open and proud of who he is and openly saying it." Finally, in sexy sex news, a letter to the editor (p. 23 of .pdf file) in the Washington Express declares, "I sat down on a red line train and looked up to see a disgusting ad for Alitalia airlines." Readers of the Washington Express will note that a reply appears in the Washington Express today. However, it is not posted online. So, if you have a copy of the Washington Express from today, and wish to email it to me, please arrange the words of the letter into a format that can be played by a string quartet and email it to me. Also, if you have a copy of the disgusting ad, please send me a link to it.

Update: Tech Law Advisor updated this post regarding this blog to include the words "all praise How Appalling how we missed ye!" This is a sufficient amount of praise to warrant pie.

Wednesday, April 14, 2004


A very important “How Appalling Reader” has IM’ed me. For those of you who don’t know “IM” is a device whereby REALLY FAMOUS people can talk to me without having to use the “e-mail.” A little box pops up on my desktop and with the “screen-name” of the person who is emailing me. So, for example, on some days “DuCkFaCeKiLla” will appear, and on other days “kItTyMiKiNnOn69” will appear, and I will proceed to talk to them.

Anyhow, this afternoon I received the following “Instant” message:

PRyOr11cir: U there?
Bashing: Asl?
PRyOr11cir: 44/M/11th cir hahah! Rofl
Bashing: kewl. What you up to?
PRyOr11cir: I M chln n d cta11, hoping dat Kerry wiL lose d election & I wiL b 4e n my post.
Bashing: cn I ask U 20 :-Qz? 4 my blog. mAbE U hav heard of it here, here, here, here, here, or here.
PRyOr11cir: n. I d internet iz 4 fags. I onlE IM ppl. I cn TLK 2 aL of my fRnds n d Fedrlst Sosiete DIS way.
Bashing: Do U suport d law clerk hirering plan?
PRyOr11cir: I hav my own plan 2 hire law clerks. I gota L%k out 4 # 1. dat iz me. I hire d law clerks dat hlp me out, wen I wnt. I M freestyle, ya knO.
Bashing: wot bout splitting d ninth circuit in2 a zillion pieces lIk midevil o somTIN?
PRyOr11cir:I rly admire d co-circuits of d ninth circuit, & d ninth circuit wud b much BetA f ther wer mo of dem
Bashing: wot judges do U admire?
PRyOr11cir: d 3:o)z on SX court.

And it went on like this until I had twenty questions and about thirty answers. I will release it at a certain "special" time, but I won't tell you the when, so my readers have to keep checking this blog. My clients will get to see the full IM-transcript sooner. The point is that “PRyOr11cir” was talking to me! This means that I am really I as important as say, two Volokh brothers standing on top of each other and chilling with Alex Kozinski.
My triumphant return: Overpundit announces it here. Angry White Clerk intimates that this blog is the gold standard for all future blogs here.
Sexually Appealing: Check my web log often for links to sex or porn-related articles. Thus, you can read about sex toys ; naked college girls ; state court judges who like porn ; Larry Flynt ; Bush cracking down on porn ; porn people ; criminal porn ; drive by porn; DOJ on porn.

I am not linking to porn-related articles from my truly outstanding legal web log to increase traffic from people looking for free online porn, porn, sex toys, sex, or free porn. People who Google(TM) porn, free porn, and online porn should look elsewhere.
Pennsylvania in the news!: In Pennsylvania news (for those of you who don’t know, Pennsylvania is a state located somewhere between New York and Maryland), Congressman Jack Murtha heard testimony from Fayette County Area Vocational Technical School students. The high-schoolers determined that in criminal prosecutions “Everyone pleads insanity and gets off free.” The students also expressed concerns about getting jobs and "Dying from AIDS." Indeed, you are correct. I am quoting high school students.

At the same time, the Chicago Sun-Times reports here that, although it does not necessarily involve Pennsylvania, Justice Antonin Scalia apologized for the actions of an eager storm-trooper who erased a tape of one of his speeches. Scalia noted that there is little need to record one of his speeches as they all say the same thing. See here, here, here, here, here, here, here, here, here, here, here, and most of all here! See here for a picture of the justice (did I mention that he is a friend of mine) learning how to release a banded bird. And in election news, Kuensel Online reports here that "...six nominees from the nine geogs contested in the election held on June 4. The gup of Kabji geog secured a fairly comfortable victory with eight votes against five votes won by his nearest competitor, the BCCI member from Khuruthang. Gup Thuji, who is the elder brother of the fifth incarnation of Seola Trulku Jamgoen Yeshey Ngedup, is reported to be highly regarded for his extensive knowledge in traditional studies and ettiquette. Many believe that this aspect of his personality struck a concordant note with the 18-member electorate." Speaking of that, did I mention that my personality and knowledge of ettiquette and is likely to get me a seat on the Third Circuit? It will, I tell you!

Tuesday, April 13, 2004

How Appalling is moving

I am moving to Legal Affairs Magazine.

Why would I move this highly popular web blog to the server of a truly outstanding law-related magazine? It is a simple issue of respect. These top notch journalists offer the utmost respect to my highly popular web log. And I respect those first class journalists (who respect my highly popular web log) who want me to join their exclusive organization.

Everyone properly respects the writers of Legal Affairs as journalists, not news aggregators. Matt Drudge is not hosted at the Washington Post web site, is he?

Wednesday, April 07, 2004

Chief Justice Rehnquist is just like me: Read the following exchange here to see that when I removed the Greedy Clerks Board from my blog roll, I showed my capacity to some day be Chief.

CHIEF JUSTICE REHNQUIST: Do we know -- do we know what the vote was in Congress apropos of divisiveness to adopt the under
God phrase?
MR. NEWDOW: In 1954?
MR. NEWDOW: It was apparently unanimous. There was no objection. There's no count of the vote.
CHIEF JUSTICE REHNQUIST: Well, that doesn't sound divisive.
MR. NEWDOW: It doesn't sound divisive if --that's only because no atheist can get elected to public
office. The studies show that 48 percent of the population cannot get elected.
CHIEF JUSTICE REHNQUIST: The courtroom will be cleared if there's any more clapping. Proceed, Mr. Newdow.
Nearly three-thousand served: By 11 p.m. today, this blog will have served three-thousand people. Counting began the second day of this blog's existence. [Imagine how many hits we would have if we had counted from day one!].

Tuesday, April 06, 2004

Since retiring this blog, I have received a bunch of e-mail requesting that I continue. Well I'm not going to do that, but all of you who are clamoring for more bashin' of Bashman can put your money where your mouth is. I will make "How Appalling" a group blog. If you wish to contribute, sign up for an account on blogger.com and send an e-mail to appallingblog -at- yahoo.com.

This page is powered by Blogger. Isn't yours?